• Filosofia del Diritto
• Kelsen
• Legal Theory
• Rechtsstaat
• Rule of Law
• Schmitt
• Weimar

In the light of the Kelsen-Schmitt debate, this work aims to retrace the heritage received by contemporary constitutions. The candidate here argues that the results of the mentioned debate prove crucial in the understanding of the ongoing rule of law backsliding: retracing the role played by constitutional guarantees throughout the thought of Weimar authors provides a hermeneutical key for the present. In the first section, the concepts of legality and legitimacy -- as declined by Kelsen and Schmitt -- is inquired as a preliminary step to the comprehension of the two different conceptions of constitution. Further, in the second section the candidate tries to underline the implications of the two theories in modern constitutionalism, also considering the conceptual relationship between the latter, democracy and the rule of law. The last part focuses on two case studies which show evidence of the rule of law backsliding (namely, Israel and Turkey) trying to point out the intersections between legislative and judiciary powers that can act as guarantees of the rule of law.